Expert: John of AllFaith - 11/22/2010

Question
QUESTION:  Dear John,
In the last 2 questions you said the Catholic Church changed the name Y'shua to Jesus and then you said they changed the  the name Y'shua to Iesous which is greek not latin. The latin is Iesus which was the spelling in latin that Pontius Pilate had written above Christ on the crux (cross) He was affixed to as well as the greek and hebrew (John 19:19). Pilate who spoke latin  was a language developed 200 years before Christ's crucifixion another latin word that predates the Catholic Church. The Church didn't exist until after the crucifixion so according to Sacred Scripture the Romans under Pilate did this. I take
from your belief in the torture stake heresy developed by Judge Rutheford of the Jehovah Witness' in the 1930's you dont belief Sacred Sripture is true (Phil.2-8)? The Romans who were pagans used a pagan instrument of death which was a cross,only Roman citizens couldn't be crucified Christ as you know was not.
 During the Passover Seder (Matt 26:26-30) why didn't Christ finish the order, he left after the Great Hallel before drinking the fourth cup? Why would a person who had celebrated Pesach at least 30 times fail to finish? Do you really believe Christ is God or just a Master Teacher?    In (Matt.26:36-44)why did Christ pray in the Garden Gesthmane that the Father take the cup away ?. Why in (John 19:28-30)did Christ drink wine on the Cross the next day?  He said in (Matt 26:29,Mark:14:25 and Luke 22:18)that he would not drink of the fruit of the vine until the Kingdom of God comes,and here he was the day after Last Supper in which he said this, hanging on a cross with a sign that says He is a King and drinking wine. When do you think the Kingdom started?
If bread and wine are pagan then why did Abram  participate in (Genesis 14:17-20) with Melchizedek,a priest of God Most High? St.Paul (Hebrews 7:1-28) refers to Christ and Melchizedek as being priests in same order.St. Paul in (1Cor.10:14-22 and 1 Cor.11:23-32)used bread and wine to celebrate the Eucharist in imitation of Christ(1Cor 1:1-2). So was the Cup of Blessing which we know from Sacred Scripture and Jewish Tradition to be a reference to the third cup of the seder which Christ consecrated at the Last Supper. So in using bread and wine at the seder and the Eucharist are you saying Christ and St.Paul are also pagans? Does the Noahide religion have anything like the Seder or the New Covenant in it's traditions? Esbats are celebrations of the full moon by witches,Pesach is determined by the phase of the moon and uses bread and wine it must be pagan also by the standard you have applied to everything else.
         Dominus Vobiscum
         Glen


ANSWER: Hi Glen,

--- ...In the last 2 questions you said the Catholic Church changed the name Y'shua to Jesus and then you said they changed the  the name Y'shua to Iesous which is greek not latin....

Questions here come from a wide variety of people (with different levels of knowledge and sincerity). When speaking in detail to people who wish to learn one is usually more specific with the terms used, while with the general "audiences" questions I mainly focus on clarity and pointing them in the right direction for further study. To clarify this point, the Catholic Church changed Y'shua's name to Jesus... it just took a few stages to get there that I didn't mention.

"Jesus" is the common English name translated from the Latin Iesus which is translated from the Greek Iesous.

The modern western Bible's use of "Iesus" for the sign over his head on the stake (stauros) is according to the Catholic Latin cannon (via Jerome et al) and is certainly not correct (the same way they use that for his name throughout).

In the East (both among Eastern Catholics and Eastern Orthodox) the inscription is the Greek letters INBI while others have it as ΙΝΒΚ. Since the Catholic Church did not see fit to preserve ANY original New Testament documents we have no way of knowing what (if anything) was really written there in the first place.

In any case, that name can not possibly be correct, in part because its not a Hebrew name, in part because it does not mean what the angel told Mary his name meant ("Yah's Salvation": Yah-Shuah), and in part because there is no way the God of Israel would have His Only Begotten Son named in honor of a false god (Zeus). Clearly the text does not say:

Matthew 1:21  And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Glory of Zeus: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Clearly it says: Matthew 1:21  And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Yah-shuah: for he shall save [yahshua] his people from their sins.

Compare:
Jonah 2:9  But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation [yeshuah] is of the LORD.

Unfortunately the Catholic Church produced the Greek and Latin New Testaments we have. There are no original writings/copies of those works in existence (unless they are hidden in the Vatican vaults somewhere, which seems likely) and so it is not certain what was originally written in any given verse. Textual consistency and history does support the assumption that the basic text remains trustworthy however, but that alterations, additions, edits and deletions did occur.

--- ... I take from your belief in the torture stake heresy developed by Judge Rutheford of the Jehovah Witness' in the 1930's you dont belief Sacred Sripture is true (Phil.2-8)?...

Completely inaccurate and another mark of your lack of knowledge beyond slanted Catholic traditions. Any Greek dictionary (including Strong's) will tell you a stauros is a pole or stake. Rutherford did not "make this up." That's ridiculous. The cross is an ancient Pagan religious symbol. The word cross comes ultimately from the Latin "crux" and not the Greek word stauros. The Egyptians and many other Pagan religions used the cross.

Even Wikipedia knows this:
The Greek-English Lexicon of Liddell and Scott, the major reference work on the Greek language from Homeric to early Christian times, reports that the meaning of the word "σταυρός" (stauros) in the early Homeric form of Greek, possibly of the 8th to 6th century B.C., and also in the writings of the 5th-century B.C. writers Herodotus and Thucydides and the early-4th century B.C. Xenophon, is that of an upright stake or pole.[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stauros

The word meaning was changed as the Nicolaitan heresies established their control of the Way. A stauros as used in the New Testament and before was a stake, not a cross.

I believe in the Sacred Scriptures as they were originally revealed. I believe we must rightly divide the Word of truth (II Timothy 2:15) and that includes being open to acknowledging the insertions and alterations made by the Catholic counsels that determined the New Testament cannon.

Phil.2-8 which you cite has nothing to do with the inspiration of scripture nor your point. If you are going to cite verses they should be related to your point.

If I thought your questions were coming from a sincere place I'd be happy to take the time to answer them all, but since they clearly are not I have better things with my time.

So I think I'll close here.

~ John

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION:  Dear John,
You judge my sincerity when the only reason I asked the first question is because of your bashing the Catholic Church. I can answer my own questions on the Pesach,because all Jewish tradition aren't in scripture either that is why most Christians don't understand how Christ combined the Last Supper and the Crucifixion to have the perfect sacrifice, the Priest offering himself as sacrifice instead of an animal. Scott Hahn has a excellent video on the subject it called the Fourth Cup.
         Dominus Vobisum,
         Glen  

Answer
Hi again Glen,

Rather than "judge" I'd say that I question your sincerity and motives with these posts. Discretion is required in all areas of life.

I do NOT "bash" the Catholic Church in my opinion. I know and have studied with many Catholics over the years (including living part time in a Catholic monastery with a group of wonderful brothers whom I deeply admire to this day.

And (not "but") it is a fact that as the Messianic Jewish sect known as the Way was transformed into Catholicism fundamental changes were made to its doctrines. The name Catholic (Universal) was chosen for a reason. Constantine, Nicholas of Myra and the others sought to merge all religions into a universal (catholic) power structure they could control. To accomplish this they created the anti-biblical claim of Peter as first "pope,"  embraced and merged countless non and anti biblical customs, doctrines, symbols etc so the people of the Empire would convert to the new religion. Those who refused were persecuted and millions were murdered by the Catholic Church. This is an historic fact and the Order of Inquisition still exists today. To acknowledge fact is not the same as bashing.

I am very familiar with the Oral Torah and related Jewish traditions then and now as well as their Pesach implications for the Master's execution.

In your posts you asked several questions that would require a lot of time to address individually. As I said, if I thought you were seriously looking for understanding with the questions I would invest the time -- as I have previously for you and scores of others -- to answer them. As you say here, you are perfectly capable of answering them for yourself to your own satisfaction.

Based on the wording of your comments (including the ridiculous accusation that I accept Russell's 'made up definition' of a word -- stauros -- that has been in use for thousands of years and that NEVER, prior to the rise of Catholicism, was understood to mean Cross) it appears that your intention is to discredit me and to groundless challenge my knowledge rather than to seek information/added insights for yourself. I see no benefit to taking part in head games for either of us. Christians disagree on doctrine. Its simply a fact.

The stated purpose of this site (i.e. AllExperts) is for experts in various fields to offer answers to questions. I've been doing this for years here and I know my field. The purpose is not to conduct debates nor for the questioners to instruct the "experts."

I volunteer to assist sincere seekers and those with questions. I am happy to answer all questions for anyone within my area of knowledge. It is my opinion that you are seeking other goals and I have much to do in assisting those who need/want my help.

Shalom,
~ John